Some Nude College Girls Filmed Themselves Making Out In The Columbia Library, For Art

Some college feminists challenged the patriarchy recently by filming themselves cavorting naked in Columbia University’s Butler Library, for an artsy think-piece about sorority initiation called “Initiatiøn.” It’s always a good day when I get to type both “naked college girls” and “my Ivy League alma mater.” (*fluffs ascot, fluffs boner*)

[Apologies, the site hosting the video crashed while I was writing this (gee, I wonder why), but Gawker still has it]

It’s a short film, but it really has everything – non-traditional gender roles, non-traditional hair colors, naked girls pouring stuff on themselves, opera music, people in nightgowns running down deserted hallways, a bored-looking girl listlessly banging a rubber chicken against cement walls – it plays like one of Stefon’s hottest new nightclubs. The shots are well-composed, but if I had one criticism, it would be that there weren’t nearly enough “circle the fat” scenes for a sorority initiation film.

Young told Ivygate that Sciortino approached her about doing a collaboration and they came up with the idea for this video. They filmed it very quickly and discreetly on a Saturday night in November. A few students were around, and they explained that they were filming a video, but New York is such an odd place that apparently no one was really fazed. They put up a tarp to block some of the weirder parts of filming. And yes, to address concerns, they did clean everything up before they left.

While Young has “never experienced a sorority or fraternity,” she is intrigued by them, and this video is a projection of that fascination. Moreover, of course, it is a feminist statement, meant to “showcase the ultimate hysteria state,” and speak to the stigmatization and fetishization of women.

This fetishization is particularly prevalent at Columbia, Young explained. “You know—as a girl—there’s definitely a weird gender tension,” she told me. It’s a fair point: the unclear relationship between Columbia and Barnard leads to confusion and the general dismissal of any woman on campus—from some idiot boys’ (and dumbass girls’) perspective, Barnard is just a pool of slutty girls to pick from. Furthermore, Young continued, Butler Library is particularly emblematic of the male-centricity at Columbia; there are, for example, only male authors’ names on the facade of the building, a historic point of protest. She was also excited about “transcending the everyday space” of the library, “a space we all take for granted.”

I too occasionally had trouble with the male-centricity of Columbia, where I was one of four men in my 23-person non-fiction MFA program. It was an issue I explored by letting James Franco throw eggs at my crotch in the basement of Miller Theater while we read New Yorker cartoons aloud in full dicknose regalia. But you guys get it, you understand art.

Ooh ooh – in news nobody but me and possibly Eibmoz care about: the third installment will star Eric Roberts and porn star Bree Olson. And Tom Six himself. And the centipede will reportedly be 500 inmates long. WHY ISN’T VINCE REPORTING ON THIS? No long necks, I guess :(

Yeeeeaaaaah… college was not like this for me. And the worst thing ever for feminism is the fucking feminists who do shit like this. Of course, I’m saying all this without watching the video and if you disagree with me you’re wrong.

Seriously, I’m still stuck on this. I thought a “fetish” is something that turns you on sexually that isn’t normally associated with sex, like Vince’s love of necks or my inability to get off unless I’m listening to the tortured screams of strangers, and I refuse to look it up for a more accurate definition. So if you’re a straight man (or a gay woman, or whatever transgendered/cross-dressing/transsexual whatever) – the entire gender of “women” is not a fetish. SO CALL IT SOMETHING ELSE.

In this context I think “fetishization” means some kind of objectification or reification but with a sexual undertone. Not that it doesn’t happen (and oh my does it) – but objectifying is also kind of a part of everyday life, and (stripped from the repressing/demeaning part that comes with it in sexism) not even an unnecessary one.

Thanks – but I’m unclear on why objectification would be “necessary” (although sure, we certainly all do it). The strongest fuel to that fire being the behaviour and presentation of some of those college girls. Don’t dress like a whore and then get all indignant when the boys check you out and try to pick you up.

Well, maybe not necessary, but unavoidable, I guess.
I also think objectification doesn’t necessarily mean harming the subject/individual (i.e. by stripping it of its features/humanity). I like to think of it as making your everyday life more liveable by not memorizing (subjectifying) ALL the things (people) you experience (meet or see).- otherwise: overload.

If you have to get naked and writhe around in a library, haven’t you already lost the argument? It’s very hard to note the pointed irony when the blood in your head is rushing south, am I right, gents? Plus, isn’t this a huge inconvenience for library patrons?

“Miss, I need … I need that book on Modigliani. Miss? Your breast is on the shelf, I … Miss?”

God, Vince, you’re gonna activate my own writing class PTSD. I hated those so much, especially the non-fiction one. Because god forbid you write a true story with some fucking humor in it instead of about miscarriages or a bunch of Europeans watching a pack of wild dogs rip a stray cat apart.

When I studied performance art at uni you could tell the students who wanted to get a good grade by how naked they got and how “edgy” the performances became. In our final year it was a lot of fun to see inoffensive slackers suddenly “drop trou” and thrash around in order to have something to show for 3 years.

I’ve never seen the HBO’s “Girls” but, I get the impression it’s something like that? A bunch of mainstream attractive white girls in an ivy league school making a bunch of non-sense all in the name of feminism.

I love the feminism movement. Its one of the more ironic things in the world. But at the same time im not complaining about naked girls making out, i just dont get how this whole group of girls didnt see how misogynist making a video of them making out naked was.

Dressing and acting overtly sexually and claiming you’re champions of the feminist movement, “we own / love / are in charge of our own bodies and will do what we want with / inappropriately display them” is NOT empowering. It’s hilariously unaware exploitation.

Again, how does that equal misogynist? Also, I can never be on board with the idea that doing what the fuck you want is exploitation. What if I want to make a video with my wiener flopping everywhere and stuff? It probably wouldn’t be a grand artistic statement, but would it be exploitative or man-hating? Maybe some guys even find it and start jacking off to it. I still say nope, it’d still just be some dude doing whatever the fuck I want.

I am sincerely sorry I could argue with you until I die without making myself understood (massive fail on my part) – and it is tiresome. Suffice to say there are many, multi-faceted opinions out there, each more emotional and self-rationalizing than the next.

@Al I’m trying to understand what you’re saying, because I think I agree with you. Please let me know if I’m putting words in your mouth. I believe your point is that these women seem to be saying that they’re tired of being treated as nothing more than sexual objects, essentially bodies to be hooked up with, then make a video where the whole point is that they’re all just naked sexual bodies.

To me, it’s like that girl (or guy because both genders do this) who state that they’re tired of only being used for sex then go out that night to find a one-night stand. If you’re really tired of that sexual dynamic on campus, ignore those who propagate it. The goal should be to deny them the sexual pleasure (voyeuristic in the case of this video) that they crave, not create a self-gratifying video where all the participants feel like they’re challenging stereotypes and changing the world without actually achieving anything. It’s not misogynistic, but I do think it’s completely misguided.

@The Flattest Eric – that’s pretty close. What’s maddening is the “I can do whatever I want, I’m not hurting anyone” attitude when there is clearly no understanding of consequences, and how they vastly differ for men and women (or, for that matter, black and white, fat and thin, old and young, etc etc). One’s behaviour does affect others, and we all need to take responsibility for it.

Everyone remember the Simpsons episode when Flanders gets committed to the looney bin and Homer reads the insulting notecards,and follows it up by saying, ” Now THATS psychiatry!”? Well my friends, now THATS feminism!

I really enjoyed the use of the rubber chicken as a symbol of the phallic nature of the oppressive modern society. they managed to reclaim this symbol and turn it into something limp and toy like. This tongue in cheek exploration of gender roles was further brought about by the ability of these women to be self deterministic in their own identity as opposed to conforming to what society has said is appropriate. My only concern is the lack of POC. I found that to be problematic and non inclusive thus illustrating their privilege

I made pretty much this exact video once. Granted, it was in a dumpster behind a library, and the sorority girls were actually gangrenous hobos I lured with the promise of day-old sandwiches, and the chicken was alive at the start of the video, and we were never actually filming . . . but the message was essentially the same.